Cargando…

Outcomes for births booked under an independent midwife and births in NHS maternity units: matched comparison study

Objective To compare clinical outcomes between women employing an independent midwife and comparable pregnant women using NHS services. Design Anonymised matched cohort analysis. Cases from the database of the Independent Midwives’ Association (IMA) matched up to 1:5 with Scottish National Health Se...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Symon, Andrew, Winter, Clare, Inkster, Melanie, Donnan, Peter T
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2695511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19520729
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2060
_version_ 1782168203894456320
author Symon, Andrew
Winter, Clare
Inkster, Melanie
Donnan, Peter T
author_facet Symon, Andrew
Winter, Clare
Inkster, Melanie
Donnan, Peter T
author_sort Symon, Andrew
collection PubMed
description Objective To compare clinical outcomes between women employing an independent midwife and comparable pregnant women using NHS services. Design Anonymised matched cohort analysis. Cases from the database of the Independent Midwives’ Association (IMA) matched up to 1:5 with Scottish National Health Service (NHS) records for age, parity, year of birth, and socioeconomic status. Multivariable logistic regression models used to explore the relation between explanatory variables and outcomes; analyses controlled for potential confounding factors and adjusted for stratification. Setting UK databases 2002-5. Participants Anonymised records for 8676 women (7214 NHS; 1462 IMA). Main outcome measures Unassisted vertex delivery, live birth, perinatal death, onset of labour, gestation, use of analgesia, duration of labour, perineal trauma, Apgar scores, admission to neonatal intensive care, infant feeding. Results IMA cohort mothers were significantly more likely to achieve an unassisted vertex delivery than NHS cohort mothers (77.9% (1139) v 54.3% (3918); odds ratio 3.49, 95% confidence interval 2.99 to 4.07) but also significantly more likely to experience a stillbirth or a neonatal death (1.7% (25) v 0.6% (46); 5.91, 3.27 to 10.7). All odds ratios are adjusted for confounding factors. Exclusion of “high risk” cases from both cohorts showed a non-significant difference (0.5% (5) v 0.3% (18); 2.73, 0.87 to 8.55); the “low risk” IMA perinatal mortality rate is comparable with other studies of low risk births. Women in the IMA cohort had a higher incidence of pre-existing medical conditions (1.5% (22) v 1.0% (72) in the NHS cohort) and previous obstetric complications (21.0% (307) v 17.8% (1284)). The incidence of twin pregnancy was also higher (3.4% (50) v 3.1% (224)). In the IMA cohort, 66.0% of mothers (965/1462) had home births, compared with only 0.4% of NHS cohort mothers (27/7214). Spontaneous onset of labour was more common in the IMA group (96.6% (1405) v 74.5% (5365); 10.43, 7.74 to 14.0), and fewer mothers used pharmacological analgesia (40.2% (588) v 60.6% (4370); 0.42, 0.38 to 0.47). Mothers in the IMA cohort were much more likely to breast feed (88.0% (1286) v 64.0% (2759); 3.46, 2.84 to 4.20). Prematurity (4.3% (63) v 6.9% (498); 0.49, 0.35 to 0.69), low birth weight (4.0% (60) v 7.1%) (523); 0.93, 0.62 to 1.38), and rate of admission to neonatal intensive care (4.4% (65) v 9.3% (667); 0.43, 0.32 to 0.59) were all higher in the NHS dataset. Conclusions Healthcare policy tries to direct patient choice towards clinically appropriate and practicable options; nevertheless, pregnant women are free to make decisions about birth preferences, including place of delivery and staff in attendance. While clinical outcomes across a range of variables were significantly better for women accessing an independent midwife, the significantly higher perinatal mortality rates for high risk cases in this group indicate an urgent need for a review of these cases. The significantly higher prematurity and admission rates to intensive care in the NHS cohort also indicate an urgent need for review.
format Text
id pubmed-2695511
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26955112009-06-12 Outcomes for births booked under an independent midwife and births in NHS maternity units: matched comparison study Symon, Andrew Winter, Clare Inkster, Melanie Donnan, Peter T BMJ Research Objective To compare clinical outcomes between women employing an independent midwife and comparable pregnant women using NHS services. Design Anonymised matched cohort analysis. Cases from the database of the Independent Midwives’ Association (IMA) matched up to 1:5 with Scottish National Health Service (NHS) records for age, parity, year of birth, and socioeconomic status. Multivariable logistic regression models used to explore the relation between explanatory variables and outcomes; analyses controlled for potential confounding factors and adjusted for stratification. Setting UK databases 2002-5. Participants Anonymised records for 8676 women (7214 NHS; 1462 IMA). Main outcome measures Unassisted vertex delivery, live birth, perinatal death, onset of labour, gestation, use of analgesia, duration of labour, perineal trauma, Apgar scores, admission to neonatal intensive care, infant feeding. Results IMA cohort mothers were significantly more likely to achieve an unassisted vertex delivery than NHS cohort mothers (77.9% (1139) v 54.3% (3918); odds ratio 3.49, 95% confidence interval 2.99 to 4.07) but also significantly more likely to experience a stillbirth or a neonatal death (1.7% (25) v 0.6% (46); 5.91, 3.27 to 10.7). All odds ratios are adjusted for confounding factors. Exclusion of “high risk” cases from both cohorts showed a non-significant difference (0.5% (5) v 0.3% (18); 2.73, 0.87 to 8.55); the “low risk” IMA perinatal mortality rate is comparable with other studies of low risk births. Women in the IMA cohort had a higher incidence of pre-existing medical conditions (1.5% (22) v 1.0% (72) in the NHS cohort) and previous obstetric complications (21.0% (307) v 17.8% (1284)). The incidence of twin pregnancy was also higher (3.4% (50) v 3.1% (224)). In the IMA cohort, 66.0% of mothers (965/1462) had home births, compared with only 0.4% of NHS cohort mothers (27/7214). Spontaneous onset of labour was more common in the IMA group (96.6% (1405) v 74.5% (5365); 10.43, 7.74 to 14.0), and fewer mothers used pharmacological analgesia (40.2% (588) v 60.6% (4370); 0.42, 0.38 to 0.47). Mothers in the IMA cohort were much more likely to breast feed (88.0% (1286) v 64.0% (2759); 3.46, 2.84 to 4.20). Prematurity (4.3% (63) v 6.9% (498); 0.49, 0.35 to 0.69), low birth weight (4.0% (60) v 7.1%) (523); 0.93, 0.62 to 1.38), and rate of admission to neonatal intensive care (4.4% (65) v 9.3% (667); 0.43, 0.32 to 0.59) were all higher in the NHS dataset. Conclusions Healthcare policy tries to direct patient choice towards clinically appropriate and practicable options; nevertheless, pregnant women are free to make decisions about birth preferences, including place of delivery and staff in attendance. While clinical outcomes across a range of variables were significantly better for women accessing an independent midwife, the significantly higher perinatal mortality rates for high risk cases in this group indicate an urgent need for a review of these cases. The significantly higher prematurity and admission rates to intensive care in the NHS cohort also indicate an urgent need for review. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2009-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC2695511/ /pubmed/19520729 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2060 Text en © Symon et al 2009 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Symon, Andrew
Winter, Clare
Inkster, Melanie
Donnan, Peter T
Outcomes for births booked under an independent midwife and births in NHS maternity units: matched comparison study
title Outcomes for births booked under an independent midwife and births in NHS maternity units: matched comparison study
title_full Outcomes for births booked under an independent midwife and births in NHS maternity units: matched comparison study
title_fullStr Outcomes for births booked under an independent midwife and births in NHS maternity units: matched comparison study
title_full_unstemmed Outcomes for births booked under an independent midwife and births in NHS maternity units: matched comparison study
title_short Outcomes for births booked under an independent midwife and births in NHS maternity units: matched comparison study
title_sort outcomes for births booked under an independent midwife and births in nhs maternity units: matched comparison study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2695511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19520729
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2060
work_keys_str_mv AT symonandrew outcomesforbirthsbookedunderanindependentmidwifeandbirthsinnhsmaternityunitsmatchedcomparisonstudy
AT winterclare outcomesforbirthsbookedunderanindependentmidwifeandbirthsinnhsmaternityunitsmatchedcomparisonstudy
AT inkstermelanie outcomesforbirthsbookedunderanindependentmidwifeandbirthsinnhsmaternityunitsmatchedcomparisonstudy
AT donnanpetert outcomesforbirthsbookedunderanindependentmidwifeandbirthsinnhsmaternityunitsmatchedcomparisonstudy